For the Birdsall
Today's Record reports on the spat between Council members Kates and Rudolph over the appointment of Birdsall Engineering as planning and development consultants to Teaneck. The major disagreement is not about whether the firm is capable of doing the job correctly or whether the price is right, but rather over appearances of impropriety and favoritism in the process. Apparently, Rudolph personally accompanied representatives of Birdsall on a trip around Teaneck before the bidding process began, which might have given the company an unfair edge in formulating its proposal, according to Kates and the other two Council members who declined to vote in favor of awarding the contract to Birdsall.
It is easy to minimize these concerns. After all, the Council and many residents seem convinced that seeking professional assistance in formulating a strategy to boost ratables in town is a worthwhile step, and by all accounts, Birdsall is well-qualified to provide that help. Furthermore, at $87,400 per annum, outsourcing the work seems to be a far more economical solution than adding an individual to the Township staff. Given the fact that the preliminary tour was conducted before the bidding process began and that Rudolph's intentions were probably not to assist any individual bidder, it is not surprising that Rudolph would reject Kates' objections out of hand.
However, Kates' reservations are legitimate and Rudolph's indignant reaction (including his harsh attack on Kates' record) is unjustified in this instance. Yes, this is Northern New Jersey and far greater offenses against the principles of good government are routinely pardoned. But that does not mean we do not have to hold ourselves to the highest standards. A savvy public official knows that any and all appearances of impropriety must be avoided at all costs. Rudolph's defensiveness may be chalked up this time to inexperience and a sincere desire to avoid further delays in implementing plans for increased development in Teaneck, as the urgency mounts. That is somewhat understandable, but it is not 100% excusable. Teaneck officials must take extreme precautions to avoid even the appearance of ethical lapses that could undermine trust in our municipal government.
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 10:17 AM
29 Comments:
you follow teaneck politics so i think you realize one important point. Jackie was looking to kill this project from the date it was labeled a "planning czar" no matter who the planner was. she was just using the tour as an excuse.
Rudolph, as quoted in the Record:
"I voluntarily took Birdsall around to show them the lack of growth and development in Teaneck during the era of Jackie Kates as council member, mayor and a member of the Planning Board," Rudolph said. "It is this lack of planned development which has caused our taxes to be high."
Those awful years of the Jackie Kates era - when the lack of planned development caused our taxes to be high. Oh how we suffered!
Now that the Elnatan Rudolph era has mercifully arrived, Teaneck is poised for greatness!
Anonymous, I do believe you are correct! This seems like more sour grapes from Councilwoman Kates. Bravo to Councilman Rudolph for making good on campaign promises so quickly after taking the oath of office on July 1, 2006.
Hooray for Councilman Rudolph! Oh, he and the new council are doing so great. Keep up the good work!!!!!!
Give us a break! Are all of you so uninformed as to believe that the Mayor alone is responsible for high property taxes and the pace of development? Property taxes started to rise rapidly in this community (and many others in NJ) back in the early 90's when the Whitman administration and Republican-controlled legislature cut state income taxes so drastically and eliminate much of the aid to school districts, leaving local communities to pick up the tab. In addition, Teaneck was already 98% developed way before Jackie Kates became mayor -- and our form of council-manager government does not give the mayor that much power -- only one vote out of seven and some leadership opportunities that are dependent on consensus-building with his or her fellow colleagues. Finally, remember that our current Mayor Katz was also a member of council, as well as deputy mayor and member of the Planning Board for two of those years, and participated actively in Council decisions during that time.
I think TeaneckBlog's comments were right on target, and Councilman Rudolph (who has only lived in this town for 3 years)would do during this time of introspection to take a large spoonful of humility and not practice the politics of "slash and burn" -- he's beginning to sound more and more like his mentor Ferriero...
Anyone wonder whether Birdsall might be connected to the county leaders who spent so much to get Rudolph elected?
Alot of these connections are becoming more and more obvious -- as anyone could see at Poppy's this morning. They aren't even bothering to hide their connections anymore -- guess "pay to play" may have come to Teaneck.
You are so right, it's all coming together. First, Rudolph takes Birdsall for a tour around town. With his unique insight into the concerns of every other member of the Council, he primes them with the correct answers to give them an "in" so their bid will be picked.
Having landed a very profitable 85K contract, Birdsall has lots of money with which to pay off Rudolph at Poppy's (or was it pay off Colonel Mustard in the Pantry). At a minimum, it certainly paid for some an extra topping on the TCBY frozen yogurt.
Give me a break. Rudolph did nothing wrong, as I think any contractor bidding on a town contractor would be wise to seak input from elected officials as to the nature of their concerns. If Rudolph refused to meet with other contractors, that would have been improper.
Therefore, Kates was off base in accusing Rudolph of inappropriate conduct. Rudolph would have been wise to ignore the comment because the voters of Teaneck already gave their evaluation of the prior adminstration by their votes in the last election - electing the most pro-development incumbant and 3 development focused challengers. Kates is a long serving member of the town council and as such, has to bear responsibility for the fact that residential property taxes have remained about 85% of the tax base throughout that period. Was Rudolph's criticism valid? -yes, was it wise? - no, it was beneath him to match personal attacks.
At most, Ruldolp might have considered recusing himself from the vote. Whether that would have been politically prudent or ethically required is debatable.
This last effort was better, but still a desperatley "seaking" rationalization. Btw, Rudolph has not "only lived in this town for three years." He might have passed his first anniversary by now.
One more thing...
I think any contractor bidding on a town contractor [sic] would be wise to seak [sic] input from elected officials as to the nature of their concerns.
"Bidding"? I didn't see anything in the Record about there being a bidding process. Was this contract put out to bid?
Jackie Kates distinguished service to Teaneck spans a lifetime. She has served on the Board of Ed as well as numerous councils and committees and has always served the community as a whole.
Mr. Rudolph needs to walk a mile or two in her shoes before he can condemn her for serving the public interest. The business of government in Teaneck needs to be more transparent
One of the numerous anonymous posters said ...
... the voters of Teaneck already gave their evaluation of the prior adminstration by their votes in the last election
Could you explain how you reach this conclusion? The only council member who sought re-election is now the mayor.
Not only that, Tom, but Elie Katz was the only council candidate who received a majority of the vote. Percentage-wise, the rest of them ranged from the low 40s to the low mid-30s.
I am anonymous from the 2:19 post.
I know Jackie Kates and she is a wonderful, well intentioned woman who has given a lot of her time in the service of Teaneck. That said, she used her position to launch a public, personal attack on the entirely benign (and not needing rationalization) conduct of a fellow Council member. Further, intentions aside, the town's record on development during her tenure speaks for itself. Her civic service requires our appreciation, but does not create immunity from criticism.
As to the election,the winners all stressed development as one of their major themes - a marked contrast to other candidates and past elections. In a field of over 15 candidates, getting 30-40% of the votes is a meaningful expression of the will of the people.
BTW, I just assumed the presence of a bidding process. If there was no bidding process, the proper question is why not - but criticsm of Rudolph's conduct becomes even harder to understand. What advantage did Birdsall get by Rudolph's walking tour?
I feel as if history is being rewritten here. As I recall, all the candidates the last council election stressed development as a major theme not just the one's who were elected. In fact, on almost all issues, the candidates' platforms were indistinguishable from each other.
i just firgured it out! we moved on from the election crying game so now we will focus on a tour that was given to help a prospective contractor understand what he was bidding on. oh my god- was red tape just cut in new jersey!
if rudolph won the powerball and donated the proceeds to the town, the same people, distractors from progress, will fault him somehow.
i am not a longtime friend of his, but someone who is impressed on how he hit the ground running july 1.
and perhaps the meeting at poppys was on how to better teanecks fight for localized blue law decisions?
The point is not that Rudolph did something wrong by meeting with a planning and development consultant prior to the awarding of the contract. The point is that once this private meeting was held, it may appear improper to hire the company that had the benefit of the meeting when others were not granted the same benefit. I still have not heard a valid argument against that.
WE ARE PLANNING JACKIE KATES RETIREMENT BRUNCH. ANYONE INTERESTING IN ATTENDING PUT YOUR NAME ON THE LIST BELOW :
RUMOR IS MIKE ,JACKIE & KEN
THE NEXT DREAM TEAM !!!!!!!
THATS THE WORD , IS L.W. NOT RUNNING???
IS SHE IN JOE.F.s CAMP OR L.W.s
LOOKS LIKE IT
DEPENDS WHICH DAY IT IS
THE NEW LIC PLATE #1 ASSEMBLYWOMAN...THATS THE RUMOR
[Sorry, I couldn't resist that word play. This is jeffostroth.]
For those of you who are interested (and not in a determined state of incurious denial) I thought you would like to know that Birdsall has made the FairlawnOnline pay2play list.
Be sure to click on Birdsall when you get there. You will see that Mr. Joe Ferriero's Bergen County Democratic Committee has done quite well by Birdsall. The firm was also pretty generous to David Ganz, the deposed mayor of Fair Lawn, current Vice Chair of the Freeholder Board, notorious Ferriero insider, and one of the honored attendees at the Teaneck Council Reorganization meeting last July 1.
This is just my initial research. As Matt Druge would say,
Developing...
I've posted the resolution that the council passed for those who prefer to see what it says instead of relying on the imaginative Teaneck Bloggers description.
Township of Teaneck, N.J. Resolution C - passed October 3 2006
Note that the it states that "the value of the contract exceeds $87,400 for the contractual period." The period covered appears to be 8 weeks according to the schedule of deliverables on page 3.
Holy cow...thank you, Tom, for pointing that out! Guess we all should get up pretty early in the morning to keep up with this fast-moving council and the "details" that few pay attention to... now who will call them on this?
Anonymous said...
Holy cow...
The council doesn't try to hide this information, but it would be nice if they moved into the 20th century and required these to be posted on the Internet instead of just on a bulletin board at the town hall.
You can "call" them on any topic by attending a board meeting where anyone is permitted up to 3 minutes to speak on issues that concern them. The next meeting is Tuesday at 8PM. Unlike the resolutions, the agenda is available on the town website.
If council meetings are also televised on channel 77.
While the resolution is helpful, it doesn't provide a detailed scope of services for the project.
It would be interesting to know how Birdsall proposes to evaluate development feasibility in Teaneck. Since they're primarily an engineering firm, I presume that their focus will be on questions of infrastructure capacity. I would hope that they intend to take a more multidisciplanary approach. Having looked at their website, I can't figure out whether they have urban designers and real estate feasibility experts on staff. Many engineering firms like Bridsall outsource this type of work to subcontractors.
Urban design considerations and real estate feasibility are crucial to this effort, lest we end up with more projects like the three recently proposed projects which are too dense for community standards, (Degraw, Herrick) or ugly and ill-conceived (Fort Lee Road).
It would be helpful for the public to get a chance to review Birdsall's scope of services.
I believe we elected the Council to take care of this. Anyone who wants to micromanage this project should apply for the Planning Board, apply for the Township Mmanager's position or run for Council.
Anonymous said...
I believe we elected the Council to take care of this. Anyone who wants to micromanage ...
Fortunately council members don't share this attitude. The council welcomes participation as well as scrutiny. It's what prevents corruption and waste.
Birdsall View (jeffostroth) said...
For those of you who are interested (and not in a determined state of incurious denial) I thought you would like to know that Birdsall has made the FairlawnOnline pay2play list.
Developing...
For those of you who are interested (etc.), I thought you would like to know that the Borough Attorney in Fair Lawn is none other than Mr. Jackie (I mean Michael) Kates.
Talk about "pay to play".
Now we're developing...
Not only are you obnoxious deniers the masters of denial, but of the gratuitously insulting ad hominem non-sequitur.
This is not about Jackie Kates' husband (though the innuendo is demonstrably disingenuous*).
This isn't even about Ms. Kates' alleged failures on the development front in years past (though she has already offered a rebuttal).
As Teaneck Blog points out, the issue is that it "may appear improper" (i.e., wrong) to award a contract to people who'd been squired around town before the council's intention to give a contract to anybody had even been announced. And it's not only that the company hired "had the benefit of the meeting when others were not granted the same benefit." One can reasonably wonder whether in one person's mind, at least, this was the chosen firm from the get-go.
As the Blogger takes great care to stress, an appearance is not necessarily a reality. And if this were the sum total of appearances, I too would be as eager as the Blogger to overlook it. But there are other warning bells, including questions about local campaign financing, that give me greater pause. I'll have more to say about this.
___________________________
* Demonstrably disingenuous: A google search reveals that Mr. Kates was appointed Fair Lawn Borough Attorney in January 2006. I can't say whether or not he would have been appointed had former mayor David Ganz not lost his reelection bid. However, the suspicious watchdog blogger for FairLawnOnline did not appear to be upset about the appointment, writing:
Kates is a Democrat from the reform wing of the Bergen County Democratic Party (his wife, who is Mayor of Teaneck, had backed Loretta Weinberg in last year's power struggle with boss Ferriero to fill the vacant State Senate seat of retiring State Senator Byron Baer) with particular strengths in land use law, a needed expertise given Fair Lawn's open space and upcoming COAH and zoning reform issues.
It is also worth noting that during his brief tenure, Mr. Kates drafted a municipal ordinance to make Fair Lawn one of the strictest anti-pay-to-play towns in the state. Fair Lawn, it appears, may be cleaning up its act. Hopefully, Teaneck will never need to.
You seem to have forgotten that Rudolph is not only new to the Council but also relatively new to Teaneck. He probably has the least amount of influence of any Council members. He just barely won his 2 year seat.
Furthermore, the County Leaders spent (unsuccessfully) tons of money to get Charlie Gonzalez elected. I believe Rudolph was an afterthought.
Post a Comment
<< Home